Weinberg, QTF, pg 60:very specific question

In summary, the instructions are to replace every a^\mu in (2.4.8) and (2.4.9) with \epsilon^\mu, and every \Lambda^\mu{}_\nu with \delta^\mu_\nu + \omega^\mu{}_\nu. This transforms (2.4.8) and (2.4.9) into infinitesimal transformations, with the terms of first order in \omega and \epsilon being kept. The resulting equations are (2.4.10) and (2.4.11), which are then used to derive Weinberg's result by repeating the process for terms of first order in \epsilon and adding it to the original result. The Unitary operators U
  • #1
Living_Dog
100
0
I have been able to read through up to here (middle of pg. 60). The instructions given are not clear: (I arranged the text so as to be easier to read on the page here.)

"Next, let's apply rules (2.4.8), (2.4.9)

Eq. (2.4.8): [tex]U(\Lambda,a)J^{\rho\sigma}U^{-1}(\Lambda,a) = \Lambda_{\mu}^{\rho}\Lambda_{\nu}^{\sigma}(J^{\mu\nu} - a^{\mu}P^{\nu} + a^{\nu}P^{\mu})[/tex]

Eq. (2.4.9): [tex]U(\Lambda,a)P^{\rho}U^{-1}(\Lambda,a) = \Lambda_{\mu}^{\rho}P^{\mu}[/tex]

to a transformation that is itself infinitesimal, i.e.,

[tex]\Lambda^{\mu}_{\nu} = \delta^{\mu}_{\nu} + \omega^{\mu}_{\nu}[/tex]

and

[tex]a^{\mu} = \epsilon^{\mu}[/tex]...

Using Eq. (2.4.3),

Eq. (2.4.3): [tex]U(1 + \omega , \epsilon) = 1 + \frac{1}{2} i \omega_{\rho\sigma} J^{\rho\sigma} - \epsilon_{\rho} P^{\rho} + . . . [/tex]

and keeping only terms of first order in [tex]\omega[/tex] and [tex]\epsilon[/tex] Eqs. (2.4.8) and (2.4.9) now become

Eq. (2.4.10): [tex]i [\frac{1}{2} \omega_{\mu\nu} J^{\mu\nu} - \epsilon_{\mu} P^{\mu} , J^{\rho\sigma}] = \omega_{\mu}^{\rho} J^{\mu\sigma} + \omega_{\nu}^{\sigma} J^{\sigma\nu} - \epsilon^{\rho} P^{\sigma} + \epsilon^{\sigma} P^{\rho}[/tex]

and

Eq. (2.4.11): [tex]i [\frac{1}{2} \omega_{\mu\nu} J^{\mu\nu} - \epsilon_{\mu} P^{\mu} , P^{\rho}] = \omega_{\mu}^{\rho} P^{\mu}[/tex]."


This may be a shot in the dark, but if I don't ask, I'll never know.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The instructions tell you to replace every [itex]a^\mu[/itex] in (2.4.8) and (2.4.9) with [itex]\epsilon^\mu[/itex], and every [itex]\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu[/itex] with [itex]\delta^\mu_\nu+\omega^\mu{}_\nu[/itex].

This turns (2.4.8) into

[tex](1+\frac i 2\omega_{\alpha\beta}J^{\alpha\beta}-i\epsilon_\alpha P^\alpha)J^{\rho\sigma}(1-\frac i 2\omega_{\gamma\delta}J^{\gamma\delta}+i\epsilon_\gamma P^\gamma)=(\delta^\rho_\mu+\omega^\rho{}_\mu)(\delta^\sigma_\nu+\omega^\sigma{}_\nu)(J^{\mu\nu}-\epsilon^\mu P^\nu+\epsilon^\nu P^\mu)[/tex]

Looks like you forgot an i. I may have introduced some typos on my own though. These things have to agree order-by-order in each variable, just like two polynomials that are equal for all values of all the variables. (Wouldn't that mean that they're the same polynomial? Yes it would, that's the point). The zeroth order terms are

[tex]J^{\rho\sigma}=\delta^\rho_\mu\delta^\sigma_\nu J^{\mu\nu}[/tex]

Next, consider the terms that are of first order in components of [itex]\omega[/itex].

(I have to leave the computer for a while, but I might post those details in a couple of hours).

Also, make sure you understand the stuff in this post (about the notation) perfectly.

Edit:

[tex]\frac i 2\omega_{\alpha\beta}J^{\alpha\beta}J^{\rho\sigma}-J^{\rho\sigma}\frac i 2\omega_{\gamma\delta}J^{\gamma\delta}=\omega^\rho{}_\mu\delta^\sigma_\nu J^{\mu\nu}+\delta^\rho_\mu\omega^\sigma{}_\nu J^{\mu\nu}[/tex]

[tex]\frac i 2\omega_{\alpha\beta}[J^{\alpha\beta},J^{\rho\sigma}]=\omega^\rho{}_\mu J^{\mu\sigma}+\omega^\sigma{}_\nu J^{\rho\nu}[/tex]

Looks like you got an index wrong in the last term on the right.

Weinberg kept all of the first order terms, so to get his result you repeat the above for terms of first order in [itex]\epsilon[/itex] and add the result to the result I got. Then do the same for (2.4.9).
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Fredrik said:
The instructions tell you to replace every [itex]a^\mu[/itex] in (2.4.8) and (2.4.9) with [itex]\epsilon^\mu[/itex], and every [itex]\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu[/itex] with [itex]\delta^\mu_\nu+\omega^\mu{}_\nu[/itex].

This turns (2.4.8) into

[tex](1+\frac i 2\omega_{\alpha\beta}J^{\alpha\beta}-i\epsilon_\alpha P^\alpha)J^{\rho\sigma}(1-\frac i 2\omega_{\gamma\delta}J^{\gamma\delta}+i\epsilon_\gamma P^\gamma)=(\delta^\rho_\mu+\omega^\rho{}_\mu)(\delta^\sigma_\nu+\omega^\sigma{}_\nu)(J^{\mu\nu}-\epsilon^\mu P^\nu+\epsilon^\nu P^\mu)[/tex]

Looks like you forgot an i. I may have introduced some typos on my own though.
...

D'OH! I didn't associate the Unitary operators of (2.4.8) and (2.4.9), [tex]U(\Lambda,a)[/tex] and [tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda,a)[/tex], with (2.4.3)!

I kept thinking that the [tex]\Lambda[/tex]'s were being replaced ("...itself...") That's what I was missing... the forest for the trees.

And yes, I dropped an 'i' for the [itex]\epsilon_\rho P^\rho[/itex] term of (2.4.3).

Fredrik said:
(I have to leave the computer for a while, but I might post those details in a couple of hours).

No need. I was confused by that one term only and the rest should be straight forward. I actually find the indexing to be helpful.

Fredrik said:
Also, make sure you understand the stuff in https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2367047" (about the notation) perfectly.

That was another question I had! How could the 2 LT's go from a forward and an inverse boost to 2 inverse boosts?

[tex]\emph{A million thanks!}[/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
[tex]U(\Lambda, a) \rightarrow U(1 + \omega, a) \approx 1 + \frac{i}{2}\omega_{\rho\sigma}J^{\rho\sigma} - i\epsilon_\rho P^\rho + ...[/tex]

then how does one write

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda, a)??[/tex]

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda, a) \rightarrow U^{-1}(1 + \omega, a) \approx 1 - \frac{i}{2}\omega_{\rho\sigma}J^{\rho\sigma} + i\epsilon_\rho P^\rho + ... ?[/tex]

Since

[tex]{\Lambda^\mu}_\nu = \delta^\mu_\nu + {\omega^\mu}_\nu[/tex]

then

[tex]{(\Lambda^{-1})^\mu}_\nu = {\Lambda_\nu}^\mu = \delta^\mu_\nu + {\omega_\nu}^\mu[/tex]

But how is this incorporated into

[tex]U^{-1}(\Lambda, a) ??[/tex]



(Sorry, I thought I could do the details by myself.)
 

1. What is the Weinberg equation?

The Weinberg equation, also known as the Hardy-Weinberg principle, is a mathematical formula used to predict the genotype frequencies of a population in equilibrium.

2. How is the Weinberg equation used in genetics?

The Weinberg equation is used to determine the expected frequencies of genotypes in a population that is not undergoing any evolutionary changes, such as natural selection or genetic drift.

3. What is QTF?

QTF stands for "quantitative trait factor" and is a term used in genetics to describe a heritable trait that is controlled by multiple genes and influenced by environmental factors.

4. What does pg 60 refer to in the context of Weinberg and QTF?

Pg 60 refers to page 60 in the book "Quantitative Trait Loci: Methods and Protocols" by Nicola J. Camp and Angela Cox, which is a resource frequently used by genetic scientists studying QTF and the Weinberg equation.

5. How does the Hardy-Weinberg principle relate to QTF?

The Hardy-Weinberg principle is often used as a baseline for studying QTF, as it allows scientists to determine if a particular trait is being influenced by evolutionary forces or if it is in equilibrium. QTF studies often involve comparing observed genotype frequencies to those predicted by the Weinberg equation.

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
608
Replies
1
Views
950
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top